Chelsea 3-3 Manchester United: Chelsea move into 3-0 lead but lose control

February 5, 2012

The starting line-ups

An exciting game featuring a classic Manchester United comeback.

Andre Villas-Boas was without Ashley Cole and John Terry, so had to field Jose Bosingwa at left-back and give a debut to Gary Cahill in the centre of defence. Frank Lampard and Ramires were also both out, so Florent Malouda came into the side with Chelsea changing formation.

Sir Alex Ferguson picked the expected side in a 4-4-1-1 shape. Chris Smalling had picked up an injury the day before, otherwise his promising partnership with Jonny Evans might have been retained at the back.

First half

The reverse meeting between the sides was an odd game because United went 3-0 ahead despite the fact they’d only narrowly been the better side. The opposite happened here – Chelsea hadn’t created much when they’d gone into a three goal lead, and Villas-Boas’ change in shape hadn’t worked particularly well despite the lead.

In that reverse meeting, Chelsea improved after the break when they moved to a 4-2-1-3 formation featuring Juan Mata behind Nicolas Anelka, Daniel Sturridge and Fernando Torres. Perhaps inspired by that, Villas-Boas moved away from his favoured 4-3-3 and switched to the alternative shape from the start here.

Chelsea shape

But it was more 4-2-3-1 than 4-2-1-3. A subtle difference, but an important one. Chelsea are no longer pressing relentlessly from the front, so while at the start of the season Malouda and Sturridge would have been closing down the United full-backs and roughly level with Torres, here they dropped much deeper to form a second band of four. Without the ball, Mata was the second highest player up the pitch, and Villas-Boas shouting to Sturridge and telling him to play deeper (just before Sturridge conceded the penalty) was probably due to the fact that Sturridge isn’t used to being told to play that role.

One impact of the formation change was that it altered the role of Wayne Rooney without the ball. Usually against the 4-3-3 he drops onto the opposition holding midfielder (often Jon Obi Mikel) to make up the numbers in midfield, but here there wasn’t really a holding player, so Raul Meireles and Michael Essien got a fair amount of time on the ball, and could both move forward unchecked. However, it meant Rooney could focus on attacking.

United attacks

In the first half United had a couple of penalty shouts. They both came from interesting tactical features – Ashley Young went down after good movement from left to right, and Branislav Ivanovic had difficulty with his positioning and runs. Young takes up a variety of positions – sometimes coming inside, sometimes going short, sometimes hugging the touchline. It makes him very difficult to play against, and he had a couple of decent moments when he got the ball.

Young and Valencia (who was very quiet on the right wing despite the pre-match concern in Chelsea’s left-back zone) could have done with better service from the centre, which may have been as a result of United being outnumbered in the middle. Ryan Giggs’ distribution in the first half was poor.

The incident involving Danny Welbeck and Cahill was interesting for two reasons – first because it highlighted what Welbeck is good at – finding spaces between players to make runs from. Against an unfamiliar back four, he was always set to be a threat, though he faded later on. It also summed up Cahill stylistically – the defender who often finds himself making covering tackles, although the inadequacy of his tackle underlines the question about his actual ability.

Chelsea went ahead after Sturridge easily dribbled past Evra, who was also poor for the third goal.

Second half

Chelsea went 2-0 up after Mata finished Torres’ cross excellently. Torres spent much of the time drifting into wide zones, which does make sense with the way Chelsea play – both Sturridge and Mata (when he’s on the left) or Malouda (who was there today) both like coming inside into central positions. Luiz’s third pressed Ferguson into action from the bench.

The period from 3-0 to the final whistle was when the real tactical excitement happened. First, Ferguson went for Javier Hernandez, on for Young with Welbeck to the left. Hernandez offered raw pace and pushed Chelsea back very, very deep – Ferguson said after the game that he regretted not starting the Mexican.

Scholes in, Mata out wide

The second change was more important. Paul Scholes replaced Rafael, which meant Valencia to right-back, Welbeck across to the right and Giggs out to the left. The new players on the flanks would both have an impact for the equaliser, but Scholes was vital because he controlled the tempo of the match and dictated the way United attacked late on.

Scholes played the central midfield role much better than Giggs

But Chelsea let him do so, by dropping awfully deep and allowing pressure to build. They were particularly bad when they won possession – they often handed the ball straight back to United – there was barely any thought to retaining it. And on the few occasions when they did have possession, they were too rushed, too vertical. At this stage they didn’t want a frantic game, they needed to calm the tempo and see the game out. Mata was the only player who grasped this concept, and by moving him out wide (when Sturridge was removed with Oriel Romeu coming in) United had even more possession, Scholes had even more freedom, and United’s third seemed inevitable.

Conclusion

Yet another big Premier League game that became a frantic contest with plenty of goals. There were three major factors:

1) Poor positional play from defenders at both ends.

2) Rash tackling – two of the goals were from penalties, another came from a free-kick.

3) The lack of thought and intelligence from the central midfield zone. United had already started to build pressure, but the introduction of Scholes and the removal of Mata from that zone seemed to give the initiative to the away side.

Say all you want about United comeback but without the two soft penalties, especially the second one it would never happened. In the first game between the sides United scored two
offside goals, in the second they’re gifted one soft, one none existent penalty. I know we’re not supposed to criticize the official’s decisions but it’s hard to do so when they influence the games in such manner. Watching this two sides is astonishing how United has a wealth of wingers (Nani, Valencia, Young, Giggs even Park) and Chelsea has none. Is it coincidence that they’ve struggled since selling Duff and Robben? As a Chelsea fan I’m really struggling to understand our transfer policy. It seems even an average winger (let’s say Allbrighton) would do wonders for us, or am I imagining things?

Engineer on February 5, 2012 at 9:42 pm

LOL, where are the tactical secret police who admonish these kinds of statements on this website?

Anyway, Martin Atkinson says hello.

David on February 5, 2012 at 10:19 pm

I really hate to talk about officials in here. But, I have to say this: DID YOU REALLY WATCH THE GAME? United could have been awarded even more penalties, two in the first half and the other one at the closing of the game. The second penalty, though, was also a doubt to me.

Zolastic on February 5, 2012 at 10:41 pm

By all means I agree. If the Ivanovic incident was deemed worthy of a penalty by Webb United could easily have a dozen penalties, why not. Sure the ball hitting Torres in the shoulder was penalty by Webb’s standard. In fact every time Ivanovic sent mean looks to a United players Webb should’ve blown the whistle. I’m sorry United fans, you were robbed tonight.

Q on February 9, 2012 at 9:08 pm

Bravo sir, great application of sarcasm there. You really showed them. If only the rest of us are as witty as you, we’d be able to sustain a constructive discussion here instead of just sniping cheap shots around.

jdw on February 6, 2012 at 6:27 am

Just tossing this up near the top so as not to be buried under all the trolling spam.

Michael: sorry to see the goof invade the comments section. I hope it doesn’t make you decide to close off the section as they usually are a very good addition to your pieces. We get to read a lot of different fans, some who regularly watch the sides more than we do and contribute insight that we don’t. I would miss that if it weren’t available to read.

But of course understand you don’t want to have on your site the level of tripe that’s popped up in this thread, nor do you have the time to continually clean it up if it’s like this.

Matti on February 6, 2012 at 12:55 pm

Yeah, this is hideous! This is (was?) the only site where I can really speak about football without some 12-year-old kids ruining everything or some blind glory hunter ”fans” pretending to know everything and still claiming that their team is the best and all their players are best (like ManU fans who claim Jones and Cleverley should start for England) and everyone else are cheating losers. Is there anyway to stop this??? I miss the old ZM comment section…

thenamestsam on February 6, 2012 at 7:21 pm

While Michael’s pieces on ESPN are excellent, they’ve brought the horrible commenters from there to here.

What was soft about the first pen? Hardly fair to blame officials – out of 4 penalty shouts, they could’ve easily given all four. 2 is probably about right.

Good teams and good defenders don’t get into positions to concede penalties. Don’t lung in and you won’t give the ref a tough decision to make.

zell on February 5, 2012 at 9:14 pm

In previous Chelsea vs Man United, there’s been the aim of dominating the game (for Utd) by destroying Chelsea down the flanks. So AVB’s formation (today) cedes this space and takes control of the centre to prevent Utd getting the ball to the wings. But had Chelsea played a holding midfielder instead of Meireles they would have controlled the game and probably won? Just checking i’ve understood this right…

Jitty on February 5, 2012 at 9:27 pm

Laughable officiating as usual from Webb.

The outcome of this fixture is essentially determined by Moggi style ref control.

Anonymous on February 5, 2012 at 9:37 pm

I think there was another main factor – after the 3rd Chelsea goal AVB conceded the front foot Chelsea were on. Chelsea started the 2nd half pressing hard, Mata was causing trouble in the middle and Sturridge was giving Evra serious problems (leading to a yellow card which would have made things even harder for Evra if Sturridge had stayed on). By taking off Sturridge and moving Mata wide Chelsea settled for hanging on to the lead they’d surprsingly got, which was a mistake against a United team who were much more comfortable attacking a sitting back Chelsea than they had been previously. Malouda for Romeu would have been better, could have shored up the middle without sacrificing Sturridge’s penetration

thenamestsam on February 6, 2012 at 7:23 pm

Agree 100%. Taking off Sturridge also seemed an odd choice as he’s extremely strong on the break and Chelsea were certainly going to be playing a lot on the break for the remainder of the game.

wee pat on February 5, 2012 at 9:40 pm

whoops, didn’t mean to leave that anonymous, t’was me…

Yang on February 5, 2012 at 9:43 pm

It looks like that ZM is United fan. Well this game is peppered with too many mistakes from both players and referee. United defense is a kind of hopeless statues. Knocking out most cup games due to defensive mistakes in this season.

Roberticus on February 5, 2012 at 10:55 pm

He is not a Manchester United fan (his club allegiance is known to many, but neither is he under any obligation to divulge it). And even if he were a Man U fan, would that somehow disqualify him from writing an impartial analysis of a football game?

Yang on February 5, 2012 at 11:14 pm

I know that ZM is not an United fan but I got impression ZM has very keen interest in United game. Game itself is very poor as scoreline tell you so I suspect this game is worth to review.

Cogito on February 6, 2012 at 12:42 am

ZM has a very keen interest in having people read his blog and appreciate his work, I presume. The Utd-Chelsea game was the biggest game of the weekend, and with neither team tactically settled into a pattern it promised to be an interesting encounter. It’s not his fault the high-profile match doesn’t live up to the billing.

Besides that, ZM has pointed out plenty of points of tactical interest: Scholes changing the game, Cahill’s potential weakness in the tackle, Chelsea’s change in formation, the subdued battle between a makeshift left-back and a winger who is usually deadly against Chelsea, and Chelsea’s poor appraisal of the necessary means to kill the game.

The fact that people choose to see a refereeing or personnel catastrophe instead isn’t his fault, and in fact, is below the aims of this blog. In the specific case of this game, it’s all the more mind-boggling – only two of the penalty shouts were given, and even with them Chelsea had a one-goal lead, which they squandered.

It also shows the challenge that this blog has, attempting to cultivate intelligent discussion of tactics is all well and good when you’re talking about teams you have little attachment to, but few can be composed when it happens “right in front of them.” Witness the difference on every Clasico comments section between those who are intrigued by the greatest matchup of league sides today and attempt to offer their (sometimes excessively, myself included) logical problem-solving assessments of the spectacle, and then, there are those who are enthralled by the very emotion of the spectacle itself, with little view to the totality of pieces which constitute it, but instead to a few specific irascible or triumphant points, like the bull fatally drawn to the red.

Not of course, that ZM is immune to this (though it is far less common than accusation suggests, and if people actually read ZM’s comment on his own allegiances, it would become clear the general risk is not worthy of too much worry), there is no transparent rational subject guaranteeing any discussion, regardless of lofty aims remains reasonable.

On a more positive note, could Chelsea’s failure to control the closing stages of match not be linked to the increasing rise in long-range shooting? Although they managed to draw corners, they were seldom played short and held in the corner. Their propensity to shoot from range increased the tempo of the game, and gave the ball back to Manchester United. This might stem both from a lack of tactical control and diminished confidence, leading to panic(ked) attacks, even when still ahead. Torres’ miss when he continued dribbling instead of firing the volley when he had an opening was symptomatic, though not from range!

Anonymous on February 5, 2012 at 10:39 pm

i thought Cahill – who i was spurious about since he is about 26 and only suddenly deemed ‘top class/world class’ which is always a strange one – was key to chelsea’s early dictating of this game. His last gasp challenges were perfect and his pace at the back highlights Terrys lack thereof. In having Cahill, D. Luiz was able to have a good game – the Brazilian way of defending is to always cover, they generally don’t like the offside trap game. So with cover Luiz actually had a decent game. Luiz isn’t crap, he needs a capable team/defence around him. He would stroll into Barcelonas team (with Puyol covering) and offer that threat of a marauding defender upfront that Pique does quite well, with perhaps a midfielder (like Busqeuts) dropping into the defence. Essien could do this, or Romeu. The question is where lies Terry in this plan. ?? I dont know, but Luiz had a good game, even winning freekicks and scoring a goal. He was at fault for the final goal (He switched off and allowed Hernandez to sneak in front of him for an easy header) but that is easily avoided.

I also thought that Evans had an awful game, as the right-sided centre back. He was always too far forward and left a gap between himself and Rio, and it made it look like Rio was off the pace but in fact Evans is far too eager. This situation led to many chelsea chances. Evans is also not very good in the air, I really don’t rate him that highly. That said Rio was at fault for his aerial weakness on Luiz’s goal – his movement defensively was poor.

Interesting game. Chelsea deserved to win the match, but I got the feeling that , after about 60 minutes, however long they played Chelsea wouldnt score again. I guess thats because they wanted to see the game out, but man united are probably a little disappointed they didnt actually win this game in the end.

DickJustice on February 5, 2012 at 10:56 pm

Let me share some of my observations. First, let’s get the refereeing out of the way, as I believe that it had a impact on the final outcome. While the first penalty was a fair decision, the second one was cheap and really harsh, it seemed as if Welback was looking for Ivanovic’s leg and he eventually found it and made use of the occasion. Shouldn’t have been given in my opinion. 3-1 was still a relatively safe margin for Chelsea, United’s second goal changed the game and exposed Chelsea’s lack of character this season. With 3-2 it was almost inevitable that United would score, Chelsea fell apart both mentally and tactically.

Another thing, I believe, is that Chelsea didn’t really do enough to win today, they were more decisive in the final third perhaps, but United outclassed them in the midfield throught the whole game. I reckon Malouda had a really poor game and was surprised that it was Sturridge who had been substituded. Despite the fact that I’m not his biggest fan, I felt that his pace could have given Chelsea the edge in the final minutes of the game. Mata played fairly well, but he was not the type of player who could take the burden of the game and carry it on his shoulders to the last minute of the game – I think this is someone who Chelsea needed the most at 3-2. More and more I see Mata to be generally inconsistent, timid and too frantic. He certianly needs some suppor in the midfield to spread his wings and it did not happen today – Essien and Meirelles weren’t really productive offensively. As much as I’d like to admit that United’s midfield can not win them titles, their teamwork was far superior today. They also outpaced Chelsea, were more dynamic and creative. I begin to wonder – does Chelsea lack squad depth and real potential to truly challange Manchester Utd or maybe Villas Boas is, after all, a mediocre manager? It appeard to me the all Chelsea goals were not the result of a great team build up or decent game plan but rather coincidence, good finishing and lack of concentration on United’s part.

To conclude, I feel Chelsea could have won today, but only with a bit of luck and better refereeing. Right now I can’t see them beating United in a, say, 2-leg game. United looked stunned after the third goal, but the second penalty decidedly helped them to get a second wind. However, I can’t believe how poor the positioning of Chelsea defenders was in the case of the third goal and perhaps the final score is fair.

Billy62 on February 5, 2012 at 11:02 pm

ZM, you’ve written at length about United’s midfield partnerships, and the need for a ‘passer’ like Carrick, Giggs, or Scholes to pair with a ‘runner’ like Fletcher. Did that factor into today at all? I was anticipating Essien’s aggression to cause more problems, similar to Cheick Tiote a few weeks ago.

It may have broadly worked here though- United were great in possession, which would be a result of having so many passing midfielders.

Rob on February 6, 2012 at 1:36 am

The trouble is Essien is an absolute ghost of the player he was. He could no more cause Man U problems with his aggression then he could drive Chelsea like he may have once upon a time.

Honestly, I didn’t really see Chelsea throwing the game away – if anything, they were far worse in the initial twenty minutes of the first half where they regularly gave Man U the ball straight back in their final third. Then Evra basically handed Chelsea the game on a plate – losing Sturridge for the own goal, not closing down Torres for the albeit excellent cross and letting Luiz run off him for the third. He was terrible. Man U got two soft penalties – both were very doubtful calls but I do think Chelsea were better in the second half then they are given credit for I think – but these things do happen in football.

kaneprior on February 6, 2012 at 2:16 am

Essien had a good game, he kept Giggs quiet in the first half, which isnt easy and had a few runs forward. He faded in the second half, but this is his first game back, give him a few more games and he can provide the steal Chelsea need in midfield with Ramires out.

Michael on February 6, 2012 at 2:13 am

I believe that, had Essien been 100% fit, he would have run rings around Giggs and Carrick.

rahul haque on February 6, 2012 at 11:47 pm

also howard webb striking for united, that helped too. no offense.

Anonymous on February 5, 2012 at 11:17 pm

The two penalties were the softest i have seen in the games i have watched this season. Evra threw himself at Stu and is ever there was a non penalty it has to the the welback one WTF?

Jambonz on February 7, 2012 at 10:23 am

At last, someone identifies why United’s first penalty was another poor Webb decision. If Webb had applied the Laws of the Game, he would have given the free kick to Chelsea. Anonymous is correct – Evra jumped at Sturridge, the foul being committed by Evra.

As a neutral, watching from afar, Howard Webb appears to be an appalling judge of when and when not to book players…from nearly ruining the World Cup final, to this game, where he failed badly for both teams – awarding penalties when he shouldn’t, not awarding them when he should, failing to book players (Young committed 3 yellow card offences in the space of about 15 mins), yet dishing out yellow inappropriately (e.g. Torres).

Comments on such ill judgements, though, are not the reason I love reading ZM. I’m interested in views on a few things: The Sturridge goal – wasn’t Ferdinand as culpable as Evra? In such situations the two defenders should be working together. If Evra was prepared to show Sturridge to the goal line, then Ferdinand was on the wrong side of Evra. Either way, Ferdinand should have been directing Evra into funnelling Sturridge, with Ferdinand providing cover, shouldn’t he?

Was Romeu the glaring weak link in the chain for Chelsea when he came on? This looked like a disastrous substitution to me – all season AVB has not looked like he has the goods.

Does anyone think Rooney was a standout? I thought he had a very average game. He certainly is the key to United’s movement, and United looked more fluid and fleet going forward with fast diagonal passing, but he didn’t get the better of Essien/Meireles for my money.

Didn’t agree with AVB taking off Sturridge for another defensive midfielder. I think that’s a mistake too many managers make: taking off an attacking player for a defensive one to kill a lead. This can make sense in some cases, but too often, it just invites more and more pressure on the team trying to hold the lead. The leading team still needs to have some sort of attacking threat or the other team just sends more and more guys forward.

Plus, Sturridge was the only serious attacking threat Chelsea had besides Mata (who needed someone to feed to be dangerous). If a forward was going to come off, it should’ve been Torres (who was having a good game but doesn’t have Sturridge’s pace).

One Veron on February 5, 2012 at 11:23 pm

I was amazed Chelsea didn’t try to kill the game off, slow it down, keep possession. Instead they made it open, at 3-0! Very tactically naive from AVB. And that Malouda wasn’t hauled off was courting disaster too.

kaneprior on February 5, 2012 at 11:27 pm

Chelsea – a strange game for both sides. In defense, you could tell it was a new CB partnership, they seemed uncertain and didnt really know eachovers movement. Welbeck took advantage of Luiz moving forward to clear the ball and Cahill not covering very well, leaving big gaps between the two CB’s. Add Rooneys movement forward and they looked very open throughout the game. Ivanovic struggled against Young’s pace, movement and trickery and looked another weak link in Chelsea’s defense. But surprisingly Bosingwa played a great game against Valencia, with Valencia rather predictable in going outside all the time, Bosingwa just played him onto his wrong side and consequently his better foot. This could be the way to play against Valencia, play fullback on the wrong side and to show him inside where he isnt as strong.

In midfield, Meireles had a mixed game. He was given time on the ball by Rooney and helped Chelsea keep the ball and played some good passes, but on the other side of the game, he left Rooney completely free to play between the lines and its not hard question deciding who you would rather have on the ball Rooney or Meireles…
Essien had great game on his first game back in what seems ages. He pressed Giggs really well and stopped him getting the ball forward like he usually does. He also got forward on occasion and looked bright on the ball, good player to have back for Chelsea.
Mata was the best player on the pitch for Chelsea, he should have been playing in the centre for Chelsea way before this, but a lack of a good left winger has probably stopped this, with Malouda not exactly shining today. His movement was fantastic, breaking forward past Carrick (who couldn’t keep up with him) and finding lots of space in between the lines and in the penalty area. His position for his goal showed this, he moved untracked to the left side to volley in. His passing was creative and sharp and he was a thorn in Uniteds side until moved out the left, where he lost control of the game.

Further forward, Malouda was poor, subdued by Rafael and had no effect on the game, surely he must be leaving in the summer? Sturridge was a lot better, and smart in his movement, dropping deep to lure Evra forward, then racing past him when he got the ball (the first goal showed this) and he had the better of Evra throughout the game. People comparing Sturridge and Welbeck have got to realise they are different players this term, Sturridge has turned into a lethal right winger, while Welbeck leads the line for United.
Torres had a great game today in everything but his finishing. His movement was excellent, dragging Ferdinand and Evens out of position (with sturridge and mata taking advantage) his build up play much better than it has been and he even came up with an excellent cross to find mata. But his finishing remains awful, which must be a confidence thing, as shown by his near chance when he really should have shot but tried to turn back on himself.

After being 3-0 up rather luckily (an own goal and a deflected header) they lost control of the game in the second half. They moved Mata out wide, removing his excellent ball retention and played a deep midfield three. This played into uniteds hands as they brought on Scholes who was given way too much room to dominate the midfield. This is the second game now against a big team where they have given Scholes way too much room in deep midfield.

Overall, Chelsea were very open in defense, strong in midfield with Essien and Mata and had good forward play in Torres and Sturridge, despite poor finishing from Torres. Leaving out Malouda, Chelsea have a very talented front three of Mata, Torres and Sturridge, they just need to bring in a good left winger in now to complement those three (ignoring midfield and defensive problems of course ha).

dearieme on February 5, 2012 at 11:46 pm

Too many cases, this weekend, of a forward changing direction to find a leg to throw himself over. Maybe it’s just too quick for the ref to see at full speed, though it was clear at full speed in MOTD – but then they presumably choose the camera angle that makes it clearest.

Rodrigo on February 6, 2012 at 12:21 am

Another typical EPL weekend where Coward Webb is standing out with some clinical calls.
Not a fan of either of the two sides but that is definitely not the way you wanna orchestrate the championship. Even my grandma now can figure out that FA’s main goal is preserving a 3-5 pt. gap between the two Manchester sides so that we have a decisive encounter at Etihad at the end of April in the closing days of the campaign and then FA will come out with some huge number of viewers all around the world. Apparently, Hollywood has also invaded the good ‘ol Premiership.Not for nothing but I find it a tad awkward and somehow funny that the two teams that were kicked out of the CL are now clawing for the domestic title which many in England consider even more prestigious and hard to win than the CL itself.

Drake4444 on February 6, 2012 at 6:18 am

Just about everything in this post is 100% wrong and complete and absolute BS devoid of any reality.

Viewership for any games for the rest of the year matter little to the FA. Contracts are already paid for. The brand is the value, and the brand is what sells future contracts. Doing anything to jeopardize that, such as influencing games, would be utterly ridiculous and throwing away money. They have one of the most recognizable brands in the world, perhaps the first or second best sports brand in the world. Yeah, they need to rig a game in early February it to keep people watching the biggest derby in the league in April.

Think about what you are saying you imbecile.

Rodrigo on February 6, 2012 at 9:53 am

Drake, you clueless fool, I`m not drawing those conclusions based on one game only. Say what you wanna say but there have been consistent ref errors in many games throughout the season so far going in both directions. Based on the pure football class teams possess currently we would have seen at least a 10-point gap between United and City had everything been called as it was and all the suspense would have been over by now even despite the lack of tactical and coaching knowledge of Mancini. And yes, they (England) still have the best sports brand but won`t keep it for much longer if they continue to consign important matches to clowns like Webb. Or perhaps dices have already been thrown and FA is following their own plot.

joe bloggs on February 6, 2012 at 1:12 pm

If Webb really wanted United to win then why didn’t he send Cahill off(which he should have done) at 0-0?

Ramming on February 6, 2012 at 2:24 pm

Haters gonna hate

…they dont wanna see it as it is.
Of course Webb isnt biased…but things happen so frantically fast in the modern game, so its close to impossible to get every decision right.

But the funny thing is, that every ABU shouting for Webb being biased and awarding 2, granted, soft pens, completely have forgotten the obvious red card after 10 mins.

Now that would have changed the game and would with all probability
have ended with United winning quite easily!

Jambonz on February 7, 2012 at 10:32 am

There may be a sensible explanation. Webb seems to keep his hand in his pocket early in matches, even when he shouldn’t – perfect case when he should have red carded a Dutch thug for the karate kick on Alonso in the World Cup Final. I agree, Man U’s most justifiable shout for a pen was the early one that wasn’t given. Equally, Ashley Young could have been sent off before half time with two yellows.

Then, in typical fashion, Webb goes crazy with cards and penalty awards inappropriately. The man simply lacks good judgement and has given many critics cause to accuse him of favouring United. Conspiracy or c0ck up? Either way, Webb is bad news for the beautiful game.

kaneprior on February 6, 2012 at 1:25 am

Manchester United – Could have won it in the first half, but I think a draw is probably the right result. In defense, Rio and Evans were poor, constantly dragged out of position by Torres and left gaps for Sturridge and Mata to move into. Rio Ferdinand in particular was disappointing, with his experience he shouldnt have been dragged about so easily, but his lack of pace meant he couldnt keep up with with Chelsea fast forward players, including Sturridge, who easily outpaced him a couple of times after getting past Evra. Evra was even worse, again very experienced, but got dragged up the pitch and then easily outpaced by Sturridge time and time again. Like Chelsea, United can only really be happy with one defender and thats Rafael, who kept Malouda quiet excellently.

In midfield, I thought Chelsea had the better of the battle in the first half. Carrick found himself with time on the ball to get the ball forward(showing the problem with playing Mata centrally?) but also failed to keep up with Mata going forward which let him dominate the Chelsea attacks. Carrick’s positioning and tracking of runs is usually very good, which shows how well Mata played, though I cant say Carrick had a bad game, he was the only player getting the ball forward to Young and rooney and was the link between midfield and attack with his great range of passing. Giggs was marked out of the game by the forceful Essien and didnt offer anything in this game. Carrick and Mata was similar to Rooney and Meireles with both leading to Mata and rooney getting lots of space, but carrick had a better game than Meireles in deep midfield with his passing.

Further forward, Young had an excellent game, getting the better of Ivanovic down the left and looking a big threat. On the other side Valencia had a poor game as he was shown inside where he very ineffective. This showed the differences between the wingers, Young was very flexible, going inside and outside and changing his game up to keep Chelsea guessing. He should have got a penalty and even a goal and looked dangerous whenever he had the ball.

Rooney played high up the pitch which had good and bad effects. He found space in between the lines and had an excellent attacking game – his two goals were from two excellently taken penalties, but his creative passing and dribbling was world class. But he left Giggs and Carrick to battle with Chelsea’s 3 man midfield, which mean Chelsea were able to keep possession well and create chances. But never-the-less Rooney was Uniteds best player on the pitch like Mata for Chelsea, and without United would have suffered.
Welbeck did well against the two Cb’s, though didnt quite dominate. He found space in behind Luiz which Cahill didnt cover well enough a couple of times, but he didnt hold up the ball very well, and as defense dropped deeper he became less effective. He also lost out to Luiz in the air, who a good game in that department. Rooneys movement into the penalty area helped destabilize the CB partnership and United were able to create chances.

In the second half, United took control of the game with good substitutions and bad Chelsea sub, almost the opposite of the Liverpool game. Hernandez came on and pushed the Chelsea defense back, which created more space for Rooney to dominate the game. And Scholes came on in deep midfield where he dominated the game with little pressure on him, mainly because Chelsea moved Mata outwide and played with a deep midfield three. He came on for Rafael which had other effects for the team: Valencia moved to RB, where I think he can have a much better game, he offers drive and good wide delivery from RB, while he weaknesses of poor goal return and inabilty to play narrowly are not important and giggs moved outwide left with Welbeck moving to the right; Welbeck wasnt very impressive on the right, but Giggs provided some excellent delivery (equalizer) with Ivanovic playing too narrow at RB.

Overall, United looked vulnerable in defense, slightly lacking in midfield until Scholes came on (though Carrick did respectable job, his presence subsided when Scholes came, almost like he doesnt really have a role in the team anymore when Scholes comes on) and threatening in attack with Rooney and Young threatening in the first half (Welbeck with his pace as well) and then Hernandez and Giggs in the second half with Rooney. Rooney was there best player today, left free most of the game,though Scholes coming on fueled the comeback.

antiphysicist on February 6, 2012 at 11:47 pm

Young had an absolutely awful game, there’s a reason he was taken off at 50 minutes, I don’t know which game you were watching.

ZM’s analysis is as usual pretty good, the biggest tactical point of the match for me was Chelsea giving Giggs a hard time resulting in a slow ball to the wings giving them time to double up and dover Valencia/Young well. It made a massive difference when Scholes/Hernandez came on because you had the dual effect of Hernandez making them sit back a bit more and Scholes passing it better, also Valencia had more freedom at 3-0 down to rampage from right back where he’s going to be tracked less, somewhat similar to how Redknapp moved Bale to a more free position to enable him space to get up to speed instead of having someone tight to him.

United had very little thread down the left wing with Young on the pitch, a lot of their best play in the first half came from one-twos on the edge of the box, which is where Welbeck is stronger than Hernandez. I think they suffer a bit from fairly inconsistent shooting from the midfield in Carrick and Rooney, it’s noticeable how often Scholes has already swung his foot at it and grazed the post, 3 times in 3 games (and most of them only parts of games) or so.

I think we finally have the reason why Ferdinand switched to the left side, it’s so that Evra can show wingers inside to Rio rather than Vidic with Rio being slightly quicker and more composed in the tackle, and Evra having lost a touch of pace. Maybe a moot point now Vidic is out forever.

David B on February 7, 2012 at 12:39 am

Since Boswinga seemed to have Valencia in his back pocket and Young had a poor to average game, varying opinions, why didn’t they switch wings? Valencia could definitely beat Ivanovic for pace, and Young could try going past (on the outside) and inside on Boswinga. Maybe perhaps Ferguson was happy sticking to status quo since Valencia negated the threat of Boswinga going forward.

jdw on February 8, 2012 at 2:06 am

Valencia hasn’t been comfortable as an inverted wing on the left side. It rarely was attempted in the past two seasons. They did it a few times earlier in the season as if it was something they were working on in training, but largely moved away from it. One suspects they’ll working on it more in training in the coming years, but he’s not close to there yet. He really is a pure Right Wing, with the big right foot.

Young in a sense is an inverted winger, enjoying cutting back in to the middle and putting the ball on his right foot. When he and Nani have occasionally played together and flipped it hasn’t been as interesting as one would hope.

kaneprior on February 7, 2012 at 2:32 pm

Maybe I was strong in my praise of young, but he certaintly wasnt poor, much better than Valencia was. He came off, because he has just returned from injury and isnt completely match fit. But he was a threat in the first half when he got on the ball, just didnt see much of it because giggs was stopped in midfield.

Welbeck wasnt that good really, his pace was a good weapon, but his build up play was poor, and he lost out in the air to Luiz. When he moved to a narrow right role, he did better, looking to run at the defense (winning the penalty) but not a vintage game for him. Rooney’s finishing wasnt great, but i dont think it was Carricks role to get into the box, he was trying to keep an eye on mata if anything.

Ferdinand is a shadow of himself though, he has lost his pace and seems scared of Players running at him. Sturridge constantly got the better of him and he was at fault for two of the goals.

dearieme on February 6, 2012 at 2:06 am

Rooney’s ball control is so erratic that I’m mildly surprised that people don’t man-mark him more: the marker would frequently get a chance to steal the ball, plus of course a fair chance of stimulating Desperate Dim into a red card offence.

Michael on February 6, 2012 at 2:42 am

I am really beginning to question AVB’s in-game understanding.

I know that he was trying to secure the midfield by bringing on Romeu, who is good as interceptions and making safe passes. But I can’t understand why he chose to take Sturridge off. Sturridge has the pace and dribbling ability to push teams back. I’d think that AVB would have considered this given Ferdinand’s habit of dropping deeper against pacy strikers. Malouda, who had been notable only by his apparent absence, would have been a better player to remove.

The change in formation was equally mystifiying. Why would AVB move his most influential player from a position where he had no direct opponent to the right flank where would have to track Evra and be forced onto his weaker side? Surely a diamond in midfield would have served Chelsea better; allowing them to over-man Man Utd in that zone, block the gaps between Luiz and Cahill while still having a player between the lines. With Ferdinand pulling Man Utd toward their own goal streatching the midfield and exasperating Scholes’/Giggs’/Carrick’s lack of mobility Chelsea would have had a much easier time of defending their lead. That’s because the Man Utd fowards would have been forced to contend with the Chelsea defence for long balls or crosses from deeper positions.

From all that I’ve read (which isn’t all there was to read here, if I’m honest) and all that I heard throughout the day, it seems I’m the only one who thinks Meireles had a very good match, defensively. He seemed to me to be, in large part along with Bosingwa, absolutely instrumental in keeping United’s right-wing attack quiet. He and Bosingwa, again, as I saw things, were the main reason why Valencia was kept so quiet throughout the entire match.

Manure Sucks Donkey Balls on February 6, 2012 at 6:58 am

Once again the referee came to ManUre’s rescue. The motherfucker Alex FerguSonOfaBitch successfully influenced the referee yet again. ManUre are a pathetic and extremely weak football club. EVERY SINGLE of their trophies have come from referee’s help.

Stevenson on February 6, 2012 at 7:17 am

Time for a managed comment system…

smoune on February 6, 2012 at 10:34 am

second that. what has happened to this site? popularity i guess.

Rob on February 6, 2012 at 11:54 am

thirded. or just ban them.

Ben on February 6, 2012 at 12:08 pm

Fourth-ed?

Can’t ban them unless you go to a ‘log in’ based comments system though. It’d be a shame, but those who take the time to write quality comments would probably still make the effort, and then you could ban accounts properly.

Please don’t just shut the comments though ZM, I enjoy the discussions at least as much as the articles most of the time

Ramming on February 6, 2012 at 2:27 pm

fifth’ed

student on February 6, 2012 at 2:28 pm

can you ban them by using the offender’s IP address? would save having to implement a logging-in system.

zell on February 6, 2012 at 5:41 pm

i agree with these sentiments and with regards to ip address unfortunately that wouldn’t work since it isn’t difficult to obtain a new one. simply turning the modem on and off changes it sometimes!

Mike P on February 6, 2012 at 6:49 pm

I agree that the people who want to make the effort to leave quality comments will continue to make that effort if they have to register/log-in. Because lord knows I’m sick to the back teeth of tribalistic fan comments and trolls. I came to this site to get away from these morons and to get a level of tactical insight I couldn’t find elsewhere. The sooner we get back to that standard the better.

Misodoctakleidist on February 7, 2012 at 3:05 pm

ZM should just delete comments that are stupid or boring.

Too many websites try to have “fair” comment policies. What we really need is arbitrary and unaccountable justice.

leeyiankun on February 6, 2012 at 8:50 am

How many pens have ManU won this season? They seemed to be getting an awful lot of ‘em. It’s the first time I’ve seen teams that score 4 times from pens in 2 games.
No wonder other teams felt they’ve been cheated out of points against them. This needs to be investigated.

Crazy game – very open
Webb was shocking – did anyone see the torres miss – not bad but world class strikers outta put that back of the net – chelsea were lucky to be 3-0 up but in the end it was a fair one

Does any1 think studge isnt that good – i hate his passing – he just cant pass, – first thing i look in a player is his passing and he sucks in that
I beleive he has a striker in him – only thing he does is run fast and shoot

Stefan on February 6, 2012 at 12:01 pm

Are the comments unmoderated. ZM should clearly delete these spam posts and insulting posts. Welcome to the internet ZM. Once a website hits a certain critical mass it starts attracting morons

joe bloggs on February 6, 2012 at 1:09 pm

I love how any poor decision that goes United’s way is part of a great conspiracy but anything that goes against us is brushed under the carpet. Yes, Welbeck dived for the second penalty but Cahill should have been sent off at 0-0.

Engineer on February 6, 2012 at 1:45 pm

And Webb loves United they say. I seem to recall him letting Balotelli stay on the pitch to score a last minute winner against Spurs.

All part of the great conspiracy no?

Dennis on February 6, 2012 at 1:15 pm

Maybe it’s time for moderated comments?

mrblond on February 6, 2012 at 1:31 pm

Chelsea’s midfield is just horrible, by top club standards. In fairness, AVB didn’t have much to turn to at the end other than hope a gassed Eissen and co. could hold on. Look at the bench. Pitiful. Rameriez was missed today as he might been able to prevent ManU from grabbing the game by its neck in the final 25 minutes. Generally I’d say he wouldn’t have helped Chelsea retain the ball if they happened to win it, but he couldn’t have been worse than those on the pitch at the end. I hate to cry about transfers that didn’t materialize but Chelsea is really missing someone like Javi Martinez or Moutinho to help win/retain control of the game in the center of the pitch. Scholes, Carrick and company took control and it was inevitable that ManU would get chances in the box. Webb, Rooney and Giggs did the rest.

Engineer on February 6, 2012 at 1:46 pm

Petition the FA to get Atkinson to referee all the Chelsea matches then.

BoHoSho on February 6, 2012 at 2:12 pm

I’ll have to say it’s a harsh comment on Chelsea’s midfield. Excluding the top 2 teams in the world I don’t see them having such a horrible midfield compared to other top european clubs. Chelsea’s problem is on the wings. There is none to adequately replace Sturridge who himself is a forward-turned-winger or Mata who is very central as a player. That is a residue from the time Ancelotti used to coach Chelsea.Instead of crying for Javi Martinez in place of Romeu I would much more cry for Muniain in place of Malouda.In that case SAF’s gamble with Valencia as a right back would have many chances to backfire

mrblond on February 6, 2012 at 2:26 pm

points taken. I don’t disagree that there is a problem outwide. If AVB is going to play Mata centrally, I guess I largely agree. I really like Eissen, although I think his dominating days are behind him, and moreso going forward Rameriez. However, if Mata is shoved out wide (and I know he comes inside but) then there is no creative force in the center/back of the MF and we’ve had trouble retaining the ball and having a patient buildup w/ the killer last pass. Iker was very impressive in the U-21 as a winger. I haven’t seen him at all this season for Bilbao but I thought I had recently read he’d been playing more central. Regardless, from what I’ve seen he’s more than capable on the wings and I happen to remember that report b/c I was suprised given how impressive he was out wide for SpainU21

BoHoSho on February 6, 2012 at 6:14 pm

Agreed on the creative side of the midfield.There is no midfield mastermind in the team

kaneprior on February 6, 2012 at 3:41 pm

Yeah Chelsea need a quality left winger to fit in with the rest of the team. Mata needs to play centrally to be at his best. Malouda has fallen so far from grace, he just doesnt seem to have the motivation to fit in with this new Chelsea attack. But Sturridge, Mata and Torres seem to have real understanding, given a bit more time to fix the defense and midfield more, then AVB can get this Chelsea challenging next season

BoHoSho on February 6, 2012 at 6:21 pm

This brings up two new questions. Will Boas be given the time to create a Chelsea of his own? And if yes will he revert to a system that will put Mata centrally where he seems to work best? Boas himself has said he is a 4-3-3 man

rahul haque on February 7, 2012 at 12:01 am

i’ll have to say that i agree, and that i also rate chelsea’s midfield a lot better than united, united generally control posession without really doing much with it because they lack a creative spark, a real no.10 in the middle of the park, their most creative option is for rooney to drop deep and try and dictate. but as english players go, then can only do so much before they’re exposed.

chelsea were unquestionably the more dangerous in this match creating a lot more open chances and opening up united several times on the counter attack. mata was influential and so was essien, the two alongside rooney were the best players in this match. one has to though talk about the debatable refereeing. it undoubtedly had an effect on this match. the two penalties were extremely harsh and gave united an incentive which they absolutely didn’t deserve; not that they were but, they were good but nothing better than good and def didn’t deserve to be on level terms just based on how chelsea opened them up in transition.

despite that, united did have an effect in the second half, avb’s tactical blunder moving mata away from the center gave united the control that chelsea really didn’t need to give.

but overall on both teams, what united miss is a world class midfield player with creativity and what chelsea miss is a world class left winger in the same ilk as a young damien duff or arjen robben or even a younger, quicker and more aggresive malouda.

points shared, probably not deserved on united’s behalf but that’s what they do, they never give up, they got some help along the way from a really bad referee but that’s how it is and chelsea should have known that given their history with united and referees.

Guwano on February 6, 2012 at 2:31 pm

Interesting observations ZM.

First half was quite even, although Chelsea scored the opener, it was clear to see that Manchester United had the better opportunities. In the second half, with the exception of a blitzkreg first 10 minutes from Chelsea, United again, dominated in possession in the deep midfield zone and Chelsea had to rely on counterattack – indicated by the United outpassing Chelsea 215 to 158 in open play.

For me, a couple of points spring up:
1. Giggs in the first half performed a role, which I believe, United have been pining for ages. He was taking on the ball and dribbling forward, beating players. Too bad his distribution vertically was particularly poor, making some poor decisions. In the second half he replaced Ashley Young on the left and other than making –another- great cross for Hernandez’s equaliser was quite quiet, allowing Evra to overlap and make the running.

2. Substitutions win matches… well almost. Hernandez for Young, Scholes for da Sliva, Romeu for Sturridge and Park for Welbeck. In my view, Hernandez was the game changer, tactically. With him on, the already deep Chelsea back four suddenly started sitting dangerously deep – to the point where any midfielder who beats the midfield 3 of Essien, Meireles and Mata suddenly had almost 20-30 yards of free space. Rooney, in particular, enjoyed this space the most, even though his passing forward mainly resulted in United losing the ball – mainly due the quality of Chelsea’s last ditch defending. It was Rooney’s pass to Hernandez, who was already at the edge the box, an indication of how deep Chelsea’s line was which lead to the second penalty. AVB was already annoyed with the lack of tracking back from Sturridge just before the penalty. He only withdrew him after the second penalty. Sturridge’s influence on the game did appear to wane as Chelsea had less and less of the ball,but surely AVB should have hoiked the ineffectual Malouda (who had 2 shots in the game, one skied over the bar and the other went for a throw on the opposite touchline) or Romeu in an attempt to deny that space in front of the back 4. Ironically, it was Giggs who supplied the cross for the goal, with Ivanovic getting no back-up form Mata in the right back position after Rooney’s saved shot (admittedly United had countered well with Valencia driving down the right touchline). It isn’t that Scholes had an amazing amount of impact on the game, but in placing him and Carrick in the middle to retain possession, forcing Welbeck inside right and Valencia overlapping Chelsea faced a tactical conundrum for which they had no answer. Every-time United pushed Chelsea looked overloaded in that left back zone. I’ll explain the effectiveness of Valencia in the right back slot later. Of course Hernandez scored his header with a good piece of movement leaving Luiz rather baffled. One substitution which didn’t take place which probably should have done was the one of Michael Essien. He gave a strong performance in the first half, but faded badly in the second, the result of having to play fresh from returning from injury as well as against a team which retains possession and passed the ball around better. Although there were few of the trademark driving runs forwards, it was his presence which limited Giggs’ dribbles from the middle of the park. Unfortunately he was rather bypassed as United passed through him in the second half where Rooney found more space and time – this was further the case when Scholes came on.

3. Mata is infinitely better in the middle of the park. He dictated the tempo of the Chelsea side as well as setting up and scoring a superb volley. Although he played in the middle, he had free rein, drifting to the wings, particularly to the left, either infront or behind Michael Carrick. In the second half, after Villas-Boas withdrew Sturridge, he was moved into the left/inside left position. With Chelsea under pressure and with less of the ball, he found it hard to profoundly affect the game. In fact most of his passes were backwards from the right-wing position, or from inside right to left wing from a deep midfield position – there simply were no better options upfront and in particular no-one moving from the midfield to the advanced midfield/forward position at a time where ball retention was key.

4. Boswinga did he job really well, that is until he was presented with a different challenge. The left back position was supposed to be the weak link of the Chelsea side. It wasn’t for 64 minutes. Boswinga handled Valencia for that time with aplomb. He quite literally stood on the touchline to stop Valencia from dribbling down the outside, forcing him to pass down the centre. The only real joy Valencia had was when he clipped a lovely little pass onto Rooney’s in the first half. At 64 minutes Valencia was redeployed in the Right back/wing back position at the expense of Rafael – probably one of United’s better players in the first half. Boswinga had shackled Valencia in the first half by staying tight to him, standing him up so that Valencia couldn’t use his pace. With the change in personnel, Boswinga was up against a tiring Welbeck, who wanted to bee-line his way to the box when off the ball. Boswinga was left in two minds, he allowed Welbeck space on the inside whilst still wary of the threat Valencia posed. Welbeck in one instance received a lay off from Hernandez and won a penalty from Ivanovic. In the lead-up to the equaliser, Boswinga couldn’t contain Valencia who burst from an unmarkable Right back position and played a one-two with Park. His cross and subsequent shot from Rooney allowed Giggs two cross for Hernandez to score.

kaneprior on February 6, 2012 at 5:26 pm

Great Comment, I agree completely.
1. Essien really stopped Giggs playing in the first half. Then SAF saw how Narrow Ivanovic was playing and realised Giggs could get space to deliver some quality crosses into the area, sort of like against Djourou at Arsenal. Evra getting forward throughout the game meant both Young and giggs on the left have good games, as it have them options in attack. Valencia never got this in the first half, Rafael took care of Malouda, but didnt really get forward. But then Evra was poor defensively as a result, letting Sturridge have too much space.

2/4. Hernandez was important, as his involvement allways get the best out of Rooney, by pushing the defense back, as well as his obvious finishing ability. Rooney was given too much space throughout anyway though, Meireles was poor at tracking him in the first half, and then when the defense dropped deeper, he found it almost impossible. While Essien had to much space to cover. You could see the thinking behind Romeu coming on, but there was too much space to cover. This new midfield three didnt really much of anything, too much space to defend, and not enough talent or energy to get forward. Scholes coming on was predictable and so was his dominance with so little pressure. Valencia at RB really impresses me, he has the energy, delivery and pace to play as an attacking option. He was quiet up against Boswingwa but with Welbeck/park dragging him inside he got a lot more room.

3/Mata definitely should play centrally, him and Torres really seem to have a good understanding that doesnt work when he is on the left. This guy has real talent, and Im tipping him to be world class in a couple of years (just needs to add consistency). Him, Torres and Sturridge look very exciting and could help chelsea challenge nest season, they just need to add a left winger (replace Malouda) and structure there defence/midfield around this talent.

David B on February 6, 2012 at 6:28 pm

Good points. Regarding 2/4, and Rooney in particular, was Romeu brought on to sit in front of the back two central defenders? If so, shouldn’t Rooney have been his main concern? Or was Rooney dropping deeper to avoid his attention? I didn’t see the game myself, but from the comments it seems that Rooney and Scholes bossed the second half. Could/should AVB have told Romeu to man mark Rooney?

Guwano on February 6, 2012 at 9:22 pm

When Romeu was on, Rooney did see less of the ball, the focus of the play shifted to the deeper sitting Scholes and to a lesser extent Carrick. As mentioned by kaneprior, the space previously occupied by Mata from an Attacking Midfield position was free with no real pressing on Scholes or Carrick enabling them vast amounts of time and space. The focus after Romelu came on seemed to be to try and hit Valencia on the run and attack the Chelsea left. For the Hernandez goal, Rooney was a classical forward, making a run into the box, attacking Cahill’s defensive position, Romeu was a good 30 – yards back, probably in a position to mop up the second ball if the cross was cleared. There’s no particular blame on him for the third goal, although Rooney was at the back of the box totally unmarked as Giggs’ cross came in. The goal in particular was a quick counter on the right, and Romeu had no-one to pick up as neither Scholes nor Carrick were gambling.

On Romeu man marking – I don’t think he needs to. Usually he seems to hold the DM position and pick up anyone entering his zone, focusing more on intercepting, anticipating and occupying that space rather than tackling and marking as such.

kaneprior on February 6, 2012 at 9:36 pm

Romeu was supposed to be the holding midfielder yes, but the gap he had to defend was far too big, caused by Chelsea defence dropping very deep. Rooney easily found space, also aided by first welbeck then Park playing a narrow wide right role and also Scholes picking him out with accuracy. Romeu wasnt given much help by a unfit Essien and a poor Meireles, who didnt seem quite sure whether he was supposed to press Scholes/Carrick or defend deep.

Misodoctakleidist on February 7, 2012 at 3:04 pm

[oops - commented in the wrong place.]

Adi on February 6, 2012 at 8:43 pm

I am actually surprised how well Bosingwa played against Valencia. A full back on his weaker side of the pitch is generally used against a winger that likes to come inside (like Robben or Messi), and I expected Valencia to dominate Bosingwa. But, as you corrrectly pointed out, it did not happen beacuse Bosingwa stuck to Valencia and did not let him go on the outside, thus negating his strength.
The knock on effect, however, was that Bosingwa himself could not join Chelsea attacks. It was even more apparent because Malouda was looking to come inside all the time. This meant that Chelsea were devoid of the width on their left side while attacking.
I think, as most people do, that Chelsea need width on their left… perhaps they should not have let Sinclair go… ?

Guwano on February 6, 2012 at 10:24 pm

I don’t think that Malouda coming inside all the time is all that bad.. Its only because the influential Ashley Cole wasn’t overlapping. Much like Evra, Cole is starting to show signs of wear and tear, particularly impacting their defensive abilities – but normally (that is, when he plays), Malouda cutting inside allow the overlapping Cole to get to the byline. Maybe with Cole’s (slowly) aging legs it would be worth picking up a line-hugging left winger.

Jose on February 6, 2012 at 2:49 pm

Credit to Man U, they were excellent after going 3-0 down but Chelsea made the game far too open. Fair play for trying to get more goals but when Man U started to open them up they should have sat deeper and retained possession better. It used to almost be first to score wins in these games, then they’d just sit back and hang on. Now it seems to be a competition to see who can win by the most goals, which is good for the neutral.

Ahmad on February 6, 2012 at 3:17 pm

Great analysis as always ZM.

Regarding the recent happenings on your comment thread, any way to add a “report” feature for profanity? One of main reasons I enjoy coming to your site is because the comment threads provide a nice forum for discussion. I’d hate to see vulgar and unnecessary comments ruining it.

Dave on February 6, 2012 at 3:52 pm

Best just ignore the morons, they’ll soon toddle off back to the comments section of youtube, or wherever they normally play keyboard heroes, with the other partially-evolved special kids.

Michael, I have a question that is a bit long for twitter. Feel free to tell me to mind my own business. I’m curious as to roughly how many football matches you watched before you felt comfortable in your abilities to tactically dissect any given game? You do it better than anyone but I’m guessing you have plenty of ‘experience’? At what age did you start paying to attention to the tactical side of the game?

KG on February 6, 2012 at 4:05 pm

As a Chelsea supporter I was surprised at how well Bosingwa played at left-back. Pre-match I thought Betrand would get the nod despite his inexperience but Bosingwa played well defensively for the most part.

Malouda has to be shown the door. Not only is he lazy (in the 2nd half there was a ball in the air that he looked at and didn’t even attempt to win) but he lacks the pace to go forward. He might be clever with the ball but that same positive turns into a negative when he slows up every counter-attack. AVB was forced to pick him in the side with Ramires & Lampard sidelined but he didn’t do anything positive.

I also have to question Torres’ fitness. He looks fat, out of shape, and has no burst anymore. There were a few 50-50s that Rio beat him too. That should NEVER happen.

AnArsenalFan on February 6, 2012 at 4:45 pm

What about the rain?

I thought it had a small but notable impact on the game. It slowed the ball down, which benefited United by limiting the extent to which Sturridge, Mata, and Torres’s raw pace and technique could affect Manchester on counter-attacks after the 2nd goal.

peter0ck on February 6, 2012 at 5:11 pm

Wow this comments section has changed drastically. It’s starting to turn into a rant section filled with annoying and classless people who only want to complain. Mr. Cox, this comments section needs to be moderated, please!

Anyways… I thought Luiz and Ivanovic were surprisingly solid at the back (besides the conceded penalty by Ivanovic). Romeu was pretty poor did not seem comfortable with the pressure United were imposing. Chelsea made a lot of panic passes and just lost control. Bosingwa was also surprisingly decent at left back. Do you think we will continue to see him as a sub for Ashley Cole? Or do you think AVB will start to give Bertrand some needed experience? I think AVB should continue to use Mata in the central role.

Stevenson on February 6, 2012 at 6:05 pm

I have no doubt that regular site readers and contributors would be willing to register to maintain the integrity of the discussions here. Do it Michael!

Specialone on February 6, 2012 at 7:36 pm

How long left does Evra have?

Goal one was terrible defending allowing Sturridge the opportunity to easily get to the line.
Goal three he was in no position to apply any pressure to Torres out wide and might as well have stayed central with the token effort he made.Added to the Liverpool goal in the FA Cup last week I am amazed the Sir Alex continues to maintain him as captain of the team…..A weak link in a not particularly strong back four!

Rob on February 6, 2012 at 10:08 pm

Maybe you could set up a tactics forum!

AB on February 7, 2012 at 3:58 am

Mata played great as a number 10, which is no surprise because he did the same thing last summer with the Spanish youth team.

Sturridge was their plan B on the counterattack.

AVB is clueless — takes their creative player and sticks him on the wing after removing the other bright spot in Sturridge, which left them with a broken team who had no outlet when they won the ball back from United. Got what he deserved.

illmatic27 on February 7, 2012 at 11:17 am

“The lack of thought and intelligence from the central midfield zone.”

i think it the problem of the whole leageu in england and thats way thye cant compete with barca o real in champions league…..ZM dont you think it is because of more direct style of playing?

Not the best Season from Manchester United but Reds come Back soon with Great Victories

Scott on February 8, 2012 at 2:44 am

Honestly I don’t understand where all the hate towards Webb is coming from (frankly I find it outrageous). Cahill most definitely could’ve and SHOULD HAVE seen red in the first half for taking Welbeck out right outside the penalty box. Replays definitively showed he got leg first and then maybe 5% of the ball. Welbeck already had the ball past Cahill when Cahill tangled his legs.

As far as the first penalty is concerned, Evra intelligently shielded the ball from Sturridge and as he was in possession, this was his prerogative. One cannot just go around bawling people over in the box. Soft, maybe, but it was sufficient for a penalty nonetheless.

For the second penalty, Welbeck was just smart enough to make sure there was contact with Ivanovic. People complain that United got 2 penalties yet they truly could’ve had many, MANY more.

That being said, Chelsea did play a fairly good game and Carrick and Giggs were completely out of their depth in the middle. Giggs in particular had a terrible game in the center as he gave away possession time and time again in the first half. Bosingwa did an amazing job of shackling Valencia (that boy really needs to use his left foot more before it atrophies away). Overall I think a draw was a fair result given how the game went. Though my sympathies extend to all Chelsea fans in regards to Torres. Even though his general play has been much better than when he first moved, when one pays 50 mil pounds for a striker, one expects more than 5 goals a season…

Jack Knoff on February 6, 2012 at 8:03 am

i already did that to your mother..

ohhhhhhhhh buuuuurrrnnnnn whatchyou gonna do now?!

Jack Knoff on February 6, 2012 at 8:08 am

and you have a terrible haircut, i mean come on wayne, no offence but it looked like you walked into a barbershop and grabbed some hair off the floor and glued it to your head

Jack Knoff on February 6, 2012 at 8:10 am

aaaargh the numbers they hurt!!

Jack Knoff on February 6, 2012 at 8:10 am

I HATE NUMBERS!!!!!

Tony on February 6, 2012 at 11:17 am

This comments section has been destroyed by an apparently concerted effort.

It’s a shame as this is great site and usually a great comments section.